Description: Subforum dedicated to SMBX-38A - a fan-made remake of the original SMBX Engine, made by 5438A38A.Forum rules: This is official Europan/American community for the SMBX-38A. Suggested to don't post stuff for this engine outside this subforum.Moderators:Lx Xzit, Yoshi021, 5438A38A, Moderators, Semi-moderatos

I feel like I need to add something to the "SMBX 1.4 vs SMBX 2.0" topic, even though it isn't the originally OP's topic. Serveral months ago when Wohlstand and I found SMBX 1.4.1 on baidu I had hoped that SMBX could evolve again. On the other hand, I saw that this would be competitor against the current SMBX/LunaLua engine. It did frustrate me a bit that the videos for SMBX 1.4 got more views than those from LunaLua. But later I realized why it got so much attention: The ease of use. LunaLua has been designed to extend SMBX and to break the limits of SMBX 1.3.0.1. It doesn't provide that neat GUI with checkboxes or textboxes to add and remove new stuff. It mainly works with lua files and some hardcoded patches to provide more and more features over time. SMBX 1.4.1 on the other hand brings all features directly to the user interface. Just with a click on the button you have the feature you need. However, when we come to specific systems like color effects or a better logic system (item-control, rng, events, ...), then LunaLua is far ahead.

Just think something like a "MS Paint Extended" vs "Photoshop". MS Paint is something that everyone can use and it doesn't require lots of knowledge, and the same goes for SMBX 1.4.1.(and yes I know that SMBX 1.4.1 has Teascript and I know that there are LunaLua APIs that only needs to be activated with a one-liner)

So why do I dislike SMBX 1.4.1 from my perspective (as a developer)?Well the main concern I have is (as you probably guessed): VB6. Visual Basic 6 is a very old language (released in 1998) and has a legacy compiler which lacks a lot of optimization which can speed up an applications from 1.5x to 4x of the total performance. In addition the Thunder-Engine (VB6 Runtime) is another abstraction layer which adds additional overhead. A decision by Microsoft (which they probably regret nowadays) led to, that the Visual Basic 6 Runtime must be supported until 2024. (I will probably write an article about it in sometime) Given that, we can speak of luck, that both SMBX 1.3.0.1 and SMBX 1.4.1 runs without problems, but with performance cost.

There were other problems too (like the DirectX 8 engine and the FMOD plugin), but they were fixed thankfully.What do I think overall? Well... mixed feelings. On the one hand I think it is sad to see that the community is split apart and that it sometimes shitstorming against each other. On the other hand I feel that everyone has got what they want. A "easy to use"-engine and a "destruction bomb"-engine.

TheCreator520 wrote:Seriously ?I just asked 38a about this and he said he knows nothing about it . And 38a didsn't even know smbx2.0 before 1.4 was released . 38a doesn't show his contact way easily , BTW . So "The SMBX 2.0 team actually asked him at some point of time to collaborate with them, but he opposed." is completely impossible .

I don't know, that's what Horikawa Otane said in SMBX 2.0 thread.

Sorry for being ignorant and rude.

Oh , sorry for being rude , me too . I apologise .But If You Keep Insulting Smbx1.4 On Youtube , I Will Be Gonna Apologise For Countless Times . ; )Yeah , Smbx1.4 Is WORSE Than Smbx1.3 , That's What You Said . I Know What Were You Thinking . But I Know It's Not Just Because Of Its Physic . ; )